[AccessD] Cascade-delete (was: Estimating Help)

Guys, does it really matter which process you trust the most -- your own or
the system's? The truth is, both are flawed. :) The best any of us can do is
choose one, learn it upside down and backa*sward, use it as efficiently and
effectively as we know how and prepare for the worst.

For the life of me, I don't see how you guys get into these good, better,
best scenarios. What's best is what we know the best, and what costs the
client the least time and money. And don't take that to mean I think it's OK
to build a database in Excel just because Excel is your tool of choice --
I'm not talking extremes -- I'm talking about Access and database
programming practices in general.

The discussion's interesting -- I've enjoyed the reasons for and against.
Just don't think one way is any better than any other -- when all things
being equal, the developer knows what he or she is doing.

Susan H.


> High User Count.
>
> Drew
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gustav Brock
> To: Drew Wutka
> Sent: 2/2/03 5:47 AM
> Subject: Re: [AccessD] Cascade-delete (was: Estimating Help)
>
> Hi Drew
>
> > I know what you are saying though, so I can't argue the logic.
> However, I
> > would be far less resistant to letting a Server side DB do things like
> that
> > for me, then a Client Side db.  Don't get me wrong, I love Access.  In
> fact
> > I like to push Access to the limits, and beyond when I can get away
> with it.
> > However, in doing so, I need it to be lean.
>
> If you are talking about a Jet backend, how can it be more or less
> "lean"?
> The frontend or middle-tier will be more lean if you let the backend
> do the dirty work it is designed for.
>
> > I certainly have NOTHING against using tools like RI, or bound forms,
> etc.
> > In fact, on occasion, I use them myself.  However, most of the stuff I
> do is
> > designed for relatively heavy use, so I keep Jet doing only data
> > reads/writes.  I don't want it doing anything else.  But that is just
> the
> > stuff I am working on.  Everyone has their own 'markets' or customer
> base,
> > and thus their own development 'traits'.
>
> That's your choice, of course. I'm not quite sure, however, what
> "heavy" means? Is it size or multiple connections (users)? In that
> case I see no idea in not letting the Jet engine do the heavy work it
> is designed for; actually you'll experience that it - when RI is
> enforced - will work faster when you do operations on related tables.
>
> /gustav
>
> _______________________________________________
> AccessD mailing list
> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> _______________________________________________
> AccessD mailing list
> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
>